Governance: The Political Science Journal at UNLV Volume 6 Article 2 2019 The Decline of Local News and its Effect on Polarization Stanley D. Taylor University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/governance-unlv Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Taylor, Stanley D. (2019) "The Decline of Local News and its Effect on Polarization," Governance: The Political Science Journal at UNLV: Vol. 6 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/governance-unlv/vol6/iss2/2 This Article is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Article in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Article has been accepted for inclusion in Governance: The Political Science Journal at UNLV by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Introduction Being from Las Vegas, Nevada, I enjoy a wide variety of unique activities and opportunities. The obvious and most famous of these are driving down Las Vegas Boulevard and looking at the neon world that is my home, losing money in casinos searching for riches that are never promised, and the occasional run-in with Elvis Presley. In addition to the exciting entertainment that exists within Sin City, I also enjoy something that one probably would not think of when imagining this desert city: a variety of local, healthy news outlets. In Southern Nevada, three newspapers are headquartered in Las Vegas. We have the center-left Las Vegas Sun, the center-right Las Vegas Review Journal, and the non-partisan, but often credited with being left-leaning, The Nevada Independent. All these newspapers provide news coverage on issues that range from county-specific events to occurrences on the national and international stage. This may not seem like a significant fact, and many would probably expect many different sources of information, yet that is not the case in many places. In many places around the country, there is little to no local news coverage. In the 1900s, local newspapers were among the most vital sources of information, and local news outlets provided citizens in their areas with the lowdown of weather, current events, and political information. As time went on, however, local news has dwindled to historic lows. Simultaneously, the political tension in the United States has steadily increased to historic highs not seen since the Civil War. The tension can be felt on the street and on social media, leading to divisions among the public. The recent 2020 protests around the topic of police brutality and the extreme discourse around th the results of the 2020 presidential election that led to the January 6 insurrection at the United States Capitol Building are just two instances where the ideological schism in our country can be observed. In addition to the public's perception of division, we have also seen increased polarization with political elites. The partisanship in Washington D.C. has increased steadily from the middle of the 20th century to a point where bipartisanship is nearly impossible. Ideological camps in both the Democratic and Republican parties have begun waging cultural and philosophic war. This has led to a decrease in efficient governing and a loss of trust in the political system by many Americans. In this article, I will analyze the interaction that local news and polarization have on one another. I argue that the country's discourse has profound implications on politics, and the most popular way that discourse reaches the public affects political views. I will argue that as local news declines, polarization will increase. In the following sections, I will discuss some of the root causes of polarization and the decline of local news. I will then conduct a data analysis to determine if these phenomena are related to one another. Polarization Issues that come onto the radar for lawmakers in the U.S. are captured by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, where policy preferences are created and peddled. Problems arise when both the constituents and the lawmakers themselves create opinions and form proposals along strict party lines. This has occurred in the American political system, leading to high political polarization that is collapsing the ideological center. Political polarization constitutes a threat to the health of the political system. It forces voters and legislators to align themselves together in opposition to legislation across all issues and severely diminishes the likelihood of bipartisan compromises being made. This, in turn, crystallizes interests into opposing factions (Baldassarri, Gelman 2008), further compounding the issue of gridlock that is inherent in democratic institutions such as those built into the framework of the Constitution. Polarization in the U.S. is characterized by adherence to radical ideology at both ends of the political spectrum. Ideological Sorting Americans have never agreed on political matters, and as far back as the nation's founding, these disagreements have been hashed out in ideological battles. As our political system reached maturity, the two-party system became dominant and allowed individuals to understand how elected officials and candidates would make decisions partially. Differing from today, the two parties were much more like one another for a long time, with both including liberal and conservative outlooks on policy preferences. In the 1960s, Clinton Rossiter, a political scientist, and historian claimed that "[T]here is and can be no real difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, because the unwritten laws of American politics demand that the parties overlap substantially in principle, policy, character, appeal, and purpose—or cease to be parties with any hope of winning a national election," (Fiorina 2016). This began to change as parties started forming policy attitudes that directly countered one another. The Democratic Party grew into the party of liberalism and the Republican Party into the party of conservatism. From the last few decades in the twentieth century to today, the political parties have become better sorted on moral and cultural issues (Fiorina, Abrams 2008). Voters have since seen these parties as vectors of political change that can stand on one side or the other of their views, effectively solidifying them in their support of their chosen side. This has been called ideological sorting and occurs when voters move to parties that share similar outlooks, making them more entrenched in their preferences and less likely to deviate from adherence to their party. This sorting of parties has had many effects. We have seen the distance between parties and their ideology, but also less difference within them (Hetherington 2009). This has led to the prevalence of party-line votes, where a majority of one party opposes a majority from the other, in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Since the 1970s, there has been a 30% increase in the party unity score, and in 2015 was sitting at 90% (Dancey, Sheagley 2017). This demonstrates how ideological sorting has polarized the parties' elites, leading to the next major driver of polarization. Negative Partisanship & Top-Down Polarization As mentioned above, the parties have become more ideologically homogenous. This has led elites within the parties to move to more extreme ideological poles. There were points where both the Republicans and Democrats had overlapping preferences, but today there is little to no preference overlap between them (Banda, Cluverius 2018). This can be seen with the increased prominence of strict party-line voting, which has increased in recent decades. The polarization of the elites is partly due to the negative partisanship that has become a norm in governance. Negative partisanship occurs when political preferences are formed not in favor of a particular political group or policy outlook but in opposition to another group. Today, larger swaths of Republicans and Democrats hold strongly negative views of the opposing party than in the past (Abramowits, Webster 2015). These negative views make their way into the legislative process, and we have seen an increase in strict party-line voting that highlights how negative partisanship can affect bipartisan legislating. Due to the increased polarization among political elites, the American electorate has also become more polarized. This is a top-down process, where the polarization occurs strongest among the high-ranking politicians who receive mass media attention nationwide. Today, partisan media sources allow citizens to match their news consumption to fit their ideological preferences (Levendusky 2013). Partisan media amplifies the messages disseminated from both political poles and puts the opinions and actions of political elites on display. With the focus on hyper- polarized elites, Americans are flooded with arguments from the polarized political elite. Because these politicians appear on the air at no extra cost, they have effectively become part of the journalistic machine used to draw in audiences and act as sources for information (Ben-Porath 2007). Elite polarization amplifies partisan-motivated reasoning (Robinson, Mullinix 2016), which explains why even in everyday life, the effects of political polarization can be felt. The Decline of Local News Local news has long been the medium of information that connected people with their neighbors and important events in their areas. In addition to providing information about developments in their communities, local news plays a vital role in driving civic engagement and allowing citizens to hold their elected officials accountable (Martin, McCrain 2019).